Roger L.S. Griffiths wrote:@Nanook: CBJ said as much previously thus it is not my opinion stated as fact despite your assertion to the contrary.

linolafett wrote:I quote CBJ for the current status:

CBJ wrote:Our main development focus at the moment is on adding new features to the game engine. The result of a lot of this work is likely to find its way into a new game rather than an update to XR, but that by no means rules out further updates to XR nor future DLC for it.

CBJ wrote:Everyone's idea of what an "X4" would be like is likely to be different, but most people would interpret it either as a new game using the X3 engine, or as a game using the XR engine but with all the features of X3 and more. Neither of those accurately describes what we are doing.

We are using the XR engine, yes, and we are working on adding features, such as flying different ships, that will take various aspects of the gameplay more in the direction of the previous series. We have taken on board the feedback we've had since the release of XR and we hope that the new game will appeal both to those who enjoy XR and to those who preferred the previous series. That's what we mean by working "towards" a more X4-like game.

Nothing in my earlier post constitutes opinion stated as fact.

Admittedly, any assertions about plans beyond XR2 is pure speculation but given the current stated intentions and past experience with the progression of the X-Trilogy what I have stated is more than a reasonable assertion.

pref wrote:The engine is the framework the game is built upon (this usually includes visualization, sound management, networking, AI, pathing, modding capabilities - the basic building blocks the game uses).
I dont know of any names, but a reference to X3 or XR engine should be clear anyway.

Thanks for the answer.
Since the XUniverse forum is the last square to share ideas after Mod section and maybe before Steam forums, its maybe clearer for incomers to read "we still building [Name of Framework] " or " adding 4k compatibility to [old Framework]".
I think it could allow better comm.

And certainly better to understand that every single feature shall be rewrote to exist in a new framework... In all fact partially.

Maybe that could avoid a bit of confusing dreams and phantasms even if they are premonitory (no offence)

Graaf wrote:I believe the Rebirth Engine is called Potential.

That sound as a personal joke even more after googling...
No reference found though...
[edit] (source wikipedia)
- "X Engine" for Xtbf
- "X2 Engine" for X2
- Reality Engine for all X3 serie
- ??? for Xrebirth

@Gligli: From what we have been told, all X-Trilogy games (X-BTF/X-Tension/X2/X3:R/X3:TC/X3:AP) fundamentally use the same engine which evolved ALOT over time. For the sake of argument, we could call this the X-BTF or the X-Trilogy engine.

X-Rebirth uses a totally new engine and is not in software engineering terms a derivative works of X-BTF from what we have been told to date. For the sake of argument we could call this the X-Rebirth engine.

Gligli wrote:saying Xbtf shares the same engine as X3AP will Strongly surprise me... I like to be surprised anyway
*waiting for objections...*

It may surprise you but from what we can tell it is the truth...

Graphics, UI, and specific mechanics evolved and features were added over the life of the X-Trilogy engine but fundamentally the core game engine remained the same... at least based on what we have been told.

It is not an unusual situation either, I have worked on products for certain employers whose software architecture foundations (c/f game engine) date back 10years or more before I started working on the project(s) in question but if you compared the two products (the foundation product and the more recent version) from a user's perspective you would not believe it was the case. It is comparatively VERY expensive to develop new software products from scratch which is generally why you may find a lot of software products are in fact just the previous versions with updates upon updates regardless of the cosmetic differences.

Roger L.S. Griffiths wrote:@Nanook: CBJ said as much previously thus it is not my opinion stated as fact despite your assertion to the contrary.

linolafett wrote:I quote CBJ for the current status:

CBJ wrote:Our main development focus at the moment is on adding new features to the game engine. The result of a lot of this work is likely to find its way into a new game rather than an update to XR, but that by no means rules out further updates to XR nor future DLC for it.

CBJ wrote:Everyone's idea of what an "X4" would be like is likely to be different, but most people would interpret it either as a new game using the X3 engine, or as a game using the XR engine but with all the features of X3 and more. Neither of those accurately describes what we are doing.

We are using the XR engine, yes, and we are working on adding features, such as flying different ships, that will take various aspects of the gameplay more in the direction of the previous series. We have taken on board the feedback we've had since the release of XR and we hope that the new game will appeal both to those who enjoy XR and to those who preferred the previous series. That's what we mean by working "towards" a more X4-like game.

Nothing in my earlier post constitutes opinion stated as fact.

Admittedly, any assertions about plans beyond XR2 is pure speculation but given the current stated intentions and past experience with the progression of the X-Trilogy what I have stated is more than a reasonable assertion.

Then you ought to reread what you wrote and I responded to.

Roger L.S. Griffiths wrote:The short version we do not know what XR2 is going to be but we do know that it will not constitute what any of us would truly consider X4 in any real sense (i.e. X3 mechanics plus bits).....

Show me exactly in your quotes of CBJ where he explicitly says "we do know that it will not constitute what any of us would truly consider X4 in any real sense". You are interpreting what he said to mean what you said. That does NOT make it a fact. In fact, IMO, he explicitly does NOT rule out having much of the same game mechanics as the previous games. And that is my interpretation of his rather vague statements.

You're coming across as stating a fact when all it is is your interpretation of what someone else said. Feel free to voice your interpretations of what CBJ or any other dev says, but be clear to others that it's your interpretation, not hard facts, which none of us can claim to know at this point.

After thinking about it a bit, I think I know what the problem is. Everyone has their own ideas about what a 'true X4' would look like. You have yours, I have mine, and everyone else has theirs. You're basing your statements on what you'd consider a 'true X4', which has never been defined in any meaningful way. So until there is an X4, if there ever will be, we won't know what it is by Egosoft's definition. And until then, your previous statements have to be taken as interpretation and speculation and cannot be stated as facts.

If we are not getting an X-Rebirth based game with ALL the features of (or gameplay sufficiently similar to) X3 then we are not getting an X4 in any real sense. It is simple logic, to try and imply XR2 will/could be an X4 in any real sense is what I believe CBJ is trying to avoid wrt the next game hence the "in the direction of an X4" comment. This is also what I believe (and based on evidence to date would appear) Bernd was trying to get at wrt his "not X4" comments in regards to the current XR. Some ignored Bernd's hints then and it would be foolish to ignore CBJ's hints now.

That is not to say XR2 would not satisfy those looking for an X4 though as we know SOME notionally X3/X4 features (e.g. multiple flyable ships) are planned to be included.

Whether linguistically we are talking mechanics or features the point is the same given...

CBJ wrote:we are working on adding features, such as flying different ships, that will take various aspects of the gameplay more in the direction of the previous series

Note "in the direction of" not copy/replicate/emulate.

We still do not know enough about XR2 to make a judgement as to whether it would satisfy those that like the current XR formula (despite it's flaws) never mind those that appear to only have a hankering for X4. From what has be said XR2 will again NOT be an X4 in a similar vein to the point that XR was never going to be an X4. We know they are working in the direction of X4 but it may not be till XR3 or XR10 (if ever) that we get sufficiently close to X3/X4 gameplay in any real sense (we do not know, and perhaps even Egosoft do not know, on that score) to justify an X4 moniker (either officially or unofficially).

Although we have been bandying around the XR2 label for the sequel based on an XR baseline we do not even have an official word on what the sequel will be called.

@Roger:
Aren't you doing a bit too much? I found you very confusing finally. I can't take your answer as true neither, sorry. Whatever some has told to you.

In my non-user level (which knows what an engine is), the problem with the non-appreciation part of this topic(and others), is the fact that we don't know of what we are talking about. I mean precisely and technically.
That's why I ask this naming stance. For, at least, a bit of comprehension and context.

Everything I have said to date is based on public posts and information, I do not work for Egosoft nor have any insider knowledge. I am however known (by my friends) to see some things more clearly than other people and when the dust has settled on certain arguments I have had in the past in-general I have been proven right (not always but most of the time).

The problem is that everyone keeps talking about X4 when there is no official definition of what X4 is (except a loose by default game sequel definition of like-X3-but-plus-bits sense).

Egosoft via Bernd stated X-Rebirth is not X4.

Egosoft via CBJ have stated they are working towards something like what we would call an X4.

Egosoft via CBJ have effectively stated the next X-Rebirth based game will be more like the X-Trilogy games but while still not X4 it will be a step in the direction of something we might call an X4.

Egosoft have not stated a title for the notional X-Rebirth sequel, nor any real specifics about it but have dropped some hints as to what features may be changing/added (but nothing to get excited/worked up about yet as I see it).

Ultimately, I think it would be best if we all permenantly dropped the X4 monika (not that I think it would ever happen) and concentrate on the specific features that we consider intrinsic to an X4.

In simplistic terms we have two product lines based on independent software baselines: one starting with X-BTF and ending with X3:AP (each game a software derivative of the previous game) and a second starting with X-Rebirth (with each successive game being an derivative of a previous one).

There is no explicit segregated Game Engines we can talk about in reality, we can only talk about the product-lines and the games themselves in essence.

ES kept talking about X4 as well - without telling us what they mean by it.
Not that it would matter, noone cares what the next title will NOT be like anyway.

They use phrases they are not willing to explain. This whole uncertainty starts to remind me about XR ads and release communication.

All we know so far is that they might implement multiple ships to fly (not the most important issue with rebirth by far).

And that lino tries to ask the team to improve on asset control.

I always try to ask for more asset control in the game, how much of my or your ideas can be put into a game is always difficult to tell. I do my best to present the requests in a nicely manner and try to think about how to make them easyly implementable.

I'm please to read everyone of you, even if I sometimes self-anger on my seat

I probably make a fuss of nothing, sorry, but with such basis (name) we could avoid misunderstandings like we had at the release of Rebirth, and the waited "dreams". - A first thing that anger me back then.
The second thing was the fact (absolutely normal) that no one knew that starting a new engine will force them to rewrite approximatively everything...

Roger L.S. Griffiths wrote:In simplistic terms we have two product lines based on independent software baselines: one starting with X-BTF and ending with X3:AP (each game a software derivative of the previous game) and a second starting with X-Rebirth (with each successive game being an derivative of a previous one).

I largely prefer this form
even if "independent software baselines" seems and could (even that is not sure) be the programming language (the very root) and completely OT here

Roger L.S. Griffiths wrote:There is no explicit segregated Game Engines we can talk about in reality, we can only talk about the product-lines and the games themselves in essence.

Maybe on this forum section...But I can't agree.
From programming language you make an API (set of commands). The result of choosing multiple API (or a single but here it will surprise me) will lead you to a Framework which you can use to create your engine... though modifying a simple command can make huge damage to retro compatibility... Solution for that, is simply Copy your old API for modifying your command to create the V.2 of your final program... Everything else still the same but the fact to have "increase" your API indicates a "segment".
To give an example, if I remember right, X2 did have for first time a scripting engine. In other words a new set of internal command (API) which leads directly (most of time) to the version increasing. That represent clearly a segmentation.

---

pref wrote:All we know so far is that they might implement multiple ships to fly (not the most important issue with rebirth by far).

Its seems to be a big piece, and a lot of people ask for it.

pref wrote:And that lino tries to ask the team to improve on asset control.

I always try to ask for more asset control in the game, how much of my or your ideas can be put into a game is always difficult to tell. I do my best to present the requests in a nicely manner and try to think about how to make them easily implementable.

X4: what we as users would like to see in the new game, as successor to X3:TC/AP, i.e. using the old XBTF 32-bit engine.
XR2: CBJ __seems__ to imply that it has the XR 64-bit engine, with the features of X3 (i.e. Flying multiple ships, have similar UI). Left silent is
(1) the availability of SETA,
(2) and/or the highway system.

I would submit that (1) will not be, and that (2) will be in the next XR2/X4 game.

Roger L.S. Griffiths wrote:Everything I have said to date is based on public posts and information, I do not work for Egosoft nor have any insider knowledge. I am however known (by my friends) to see some things more clearly than other people and when the dust has settled on certain arguments I have had in the past in-general I have been proven right (not always but most of the time).

and not overly arrogant at all, you're too modest about your awesomeness.

Roger L.S. Griffiths wrote:If we are not getting an X-Rebirth based game with ALL the features of (or gameplay sufficiently similar to) X3 then we are not getting an X4 in any real sense

X3 with extra features, several tweaks to the main codebase, and a heap of good stuff from mods would obviously be considered X4. So maybe you're not as clear in seeing things after all.

I don't think they'll do this, not even with the new X3 patch. What I do think CBJ and Bernd are saying is that XR2 will be XR with a few more trade and/or ship management features and a couple of extra cockpits. I'm not holding my breath in anticipation for any of that.

gbjbaanb wrote:What I do think CBJ and Bernd are saying is that XR2 will be XR with a few more trade and/or ship management features and a couple of extra cockpits. I'm not holding my breath in anticipation for any of that.

I can assure, that this is not going to happen
Please do not speculate too much about the few things we have said so far. As soon as I am allowed to tell what we are doing, I will do that.
I sadly can not decide when its going to happen, but lets try to keep the discussions here down to earth and not end in very wrong assumptions as the one above